| | I'd like to see some sort of evidence that PP's "aggressive marketing in minority communities" is largely responsible for disparate abortion rates. Also, the abortion and cancer stuff remains a stretch. While women who've given birth eventually have lower risk of breast cancer, for 5-15 years afterward the risk is higher - Liu et al (2002), ''Cancer Causes & Control'', 13: 299-305; Lambe et al (1994), NEJM, 331:5-9. Also, having an abortion has been linked to decreased risk of other cancers - Parslov et al (2000), ''American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology'', 182:23-29. So, not really that simple after all. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 18:51, 2 April 2007 (EDT) | | I'd like to see some sort of evidence that PP's "aggressive marketing in minority communities" is largely responsible for disparate abortion rates. Also, the abortion and cancer stuff remains a stretch. While women who've given birth eventually have lower risk of breast cancer, for 5-15 years afterward the risk is higher - Liu et al (2002), ''Cancer Causes & Control'', 13: 299-305; Lambe et al (1994), NEJM, 331:5-9. Also, having an abortion has been linked to decreased risk of other cancers - Parslov et al (2000), ''American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology'', 182:23-29. So, not really that simple after all. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 18:51, 2 April 2007 (EDT) |
| | + | : No, it is that simple. Virtually every study has shown an increased risk. To say that birth increases a breast cancer risk for 5-15 years afterward is silly, because the rate of breast cancer for young women who have not had abortions is very small. That claim is simply playing tricks with statistics. There is a billion dollar industry and an army of politicians trying to tell women abortion doesn't increase breast cancer risk, just as was done for tobacco in the 1940s and 1950s. I'm not fooled, and don't want women to be either. |